Legal Opinion
Fuqua v. Unisys Corp.
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided June 30, 1989No. Civ. 4-88-83PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
ROSENBAUM, District Judge.
Plaintiff in this diversity action alleges a breach of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes, §§ 363.01, et seq. In reply, defendant moves for summary judgment, pursuant to Rule 56, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, arguing plaintiff has failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination pursuant to that Act. For the reasons given herein, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted.
I. Background
Plaintiff is an employee of defendant, working as a general laborer performing tasks such as moving furniture, washing windows, cleaning…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- School Bd. of Nassau Cty. v. ArlineSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Mary Ellen Byrne v. Board of Education, School of West Allis-West MilwaukeeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
- Chiles v. Machine Shop, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000
- McLain v. Andersen Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009
- Howard v. Navistar International, Transportation Corp.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1995
- Stone v. St. Joseph's Hosp. of ParkersburgWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2000
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.